Dunphy and Stace's model provides a realistic structure that allows leaders to diagnose the scale and scope of change required, facilitating the selection of strategies that are suitable for the risk and impact. By employing this structured approach, organizations can effectively plan and execute change initiatives that are classified as fine-tuning, incremental adjustments, modular transformation, and corporate transformation, while also ensuring that the effort and resources allocated to the goal are in accordance with the scale of the mission (Weiss, 2016). Although contingency models are not commonly used, this model allows leaders to avoid a one-size-fits-all mentality, thereby guaranteeing that change initiatives are proportional to the intended outcomes and the broader organizational environment (Riaz et al., 2023). Hence, it is necessary to consistently evaluate the success and suitability of strategies as changes continue to develop. Nevertheless, Dunphy and Stace have provided a model for navigating the complex nature of organizational change, regardless of its magnitude.

Dunphy and Stace's four levels of change are similar to the transitional, developmental, and transformational change categories identified by Ackerman & Anderson (2010). The initial two levels, fine-tuning and incremental adjustments, are symbolic of developmental change, in which modifications are gradual and methodical while they reinforce existing systems and skills. The transitional change that modular transformation entails, which involves substantial realignment but not the wholesale reinvention of the organization, is characterized by radical shifts in particular company departments or processes. Finally, corporate transformation is fundamentally equivalent to transformational change, necessitating a comprehensive overhaul of system-wide operations, strategy, and culture (Stobierski, 2020). Hence, Dunphy and Stace offer a more detailed framework that enables leaders to map Ackerman & Anderson's categories onto specific organizational interventions. This connection guarantees that leaders can align their strategies, communication, and resource allocation with the scope and complexity of the change they are contributing to. Therefore, both models serve as parallel frameworks for evaluating change at each level.

Dunphy and Stace's model may be employed by leaders to determine the level of effort required during a change in the organization, including a plan of action that is appropriate and effective. For example, a company that intends to implement a new software system throughout the organization may determine whether this represents fine-tuning, incremental adjustment, modular, or corporate transformation based on the anticipated impacts. The model recommends the implementation of transformative strategies, such as flexible planning and comprehensive stakeholder engagement, if the system's implementation significantly alters workflows, roles, and even the company's strategy. Conversely, modular transformation principles should be implemented when only one department is affected, with an emphasis on meticulous integration and targeted leadership. Leaders can efficiently deploy resources by aligning the level of change with the company's requirements, which prevents both underestimating and overcomplicating the process. Nevertheless, Dunphy and Stace's model allows leaders to align efforts to change with organizational objectives, thereby increasing the probability of successful, sustainable change.

How does an organization know how much to change during the incremental adjustment phase? Answer with a 5-sentence paragraph